Decision on notification of an application

for resource consent under the Resource

Management Act 1991
Discretionary activity

Application number: LUC60324964

Applicant: Perrit Trust
Site address: 74 Paritai Drive, Orakei, Auckland
Legal description: Lot 1 DP 413272
Proposal:
To undertake noise testing of two helicopter craft with a maximum of six trips over three
hours within a single day.
The resource consents required are:

Land use consents (s9) – LUC60324964

Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part)

• The proposal involves helicopter landing and take-off manoeuvres which is a temporary
noise event in the residential zone. This is a discretionary activity pursuant to rule
E40.4.1 (A14).

Decision
I have read the application, supporting documents, and the report and recommendations on the
consent application. I am satisfied that I have sufficient information to consider the matters
required by the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and to make a decision under
delegated authority on notification.

Public notification
Under section 95A of the RMA this application shall proceed without public notification because:

1. Under step 1, public notification is not mandatory as:

a. the applicant has not requested it

b. there are no outstanding or refused requests for further information, and

c. the application does not involve any exchange of recreation reserve land under s15AA
of the Reserves Act 1977.

2. Under step 2, public notification is not precluded as:

a. there is no rule or NES that specifically precludes public notification of the activities,
and

b. the application is for an activity other than those specified in s95A(5)(b).

LUC60324964 Page 1
 3. Under step 3, public notification is not required as:

a. the application is for an activity that is not subject to a rule that specifically requires it,
and

b. the activity will have or is likely to have adverse effects on the environment that are no
more than minor because:

o The proposed event is for a single day over a period of three hours during day
time. The proposal involves six trips during this period. The adverse effects onto
the character and amenity of the residential area are considered to be temporary
and short term.
o The noise levels are expected to comply for those sites beyond the adjacent
properties, when taking into account the temporary noise event standards. In this
regard, the noise levels generated from the proposal in the context of the wider
residential neighbourhood will not detract from its prevailing amenity and
character.
o Any potential adverse onto the traffic and pedestrians on Paritai Drive and Tamaki
Drive are temporary in nature. Temporary signage will be installed on Paritai Drive
to ensure that pedestrians and drivers are warned of the potential flights to be
undertaken on the day. The proposal will not result in any permanent change in
behaviour which would require any changes to the operation of these road
networks.
4. Under step 4, there are no special circumstances that warrant the application being publicly
notified. While the noise testing proposal is not a typical occurrence, it is a temporary
activity of a short duration which has nothing overly unusual about it to suggest that public
notification should occur. This proposal to test helicopter noise does not predetermine any
findings or decisions in relation to any proposals [should they eventuate] for a permanent
helipad either at this location or close by.

Limited notification
Under section 95B of the RMA this application shall proceed without limited notification
because:

1. Under step 1, limited notification is not mandatory as:

a. there are no protected customary rights groups or customary marine title groups
affected by this proposal, and

b. no persons to whom a statutory acknowledgement is made is adversely affected by this

proposal.

2. Under step 2, limited notification is not precluded as:

a. there is no rule or NES that specifically precludes limited notification of the activities,
and

b. the application is for an activity other than those specified in s95B(6)(b).

3. Under step 3, limited notification is not required as:

a. this application is not for a boundary activity or prescribed activity, and

LUC60324964 Page 2
 b. disregarding those persons who have provided their written approval, no other person
is considered adversely affected by the proposal because:

o The acoustic assessment provided by the applicant has demonstrated the noise
limits of the temporary noise events (E40.6.4 (1) (b) (i)) can be met at 1m from any
neighbour sites where written approvals have not been obtained.
o The proposal will be implemented subject to a noise management plan, which
includes pre-warning of the activity to persons at these properties. The
Management Plan would require the provision of contact details to ensure that any
complaints generated from the activity are managed.
o In terms of any potential dust and debris potentially generated from the wind, it is
noted that these persons are separated by a distance of 20 metres and screened
by the existing built form. A condition is proposed by the applicant to manage and
reduce potential dust and debris generation.
4. Under step 4, there are no special circumstances that warrant the application being limited
notified to any persons. While the noise testing proposal is not a typical occurrence, it is a
temporary activity of a short duration which has nothing overly unusual about it to suggest
that limited notification should occur.

5. This proposal to test helicopter noise does not predetermine any findings or decisions in
relation to any proposals [should they eventuate] for a permanent helipad at this location or
close by.

Accordingly, this application shall proceed on a NON-NOTIFIED basis.

Barry Kaye

Duty Commissioner

4 October 2018

LUC60324964 Page 3
 Decision on an application for resource
consent under the Resource Management
Act 1991
Discretionary activity

Application number: LUC60324964

Applicant: Perrit Trust
Site address: 74 Paritai Drive, Orakei, Auckland
Legal description: Lot 1 DP 413272
Proposal:
To undertake noise testing of two helicopter craft with a maximum of six trips over three
hours within a single day.
The resource consents required are:

Land use consents (s9) – LUC60324964

Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part)

• The proposal involves helicopter landing and take-off manoeuvres which is a temporary
noise event in the residential zone. This is a discretionary activity pursuant to rule
E40.4.1 (A14).

Decision
I have read the application, supporting documents, and the report and recommendations on the
consent application. I am satisfied that I have sufficient information to consider the matters
required by the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and make a decision under delegated
authority on the application.

Acting under delegated authority, under sections 104, 104B and Part 2 of the RMA, the
application is GRANTED.

1. Reasons
The reasons for this decision are:

1. In accordance with an assessment under ss104(1)(a) and (ab) of the RMA the actual and
potential effects from the proposal will be acceptable as:

a. In terms of noise, it is acceptable to use the temporary noise event standards given the
temporary nature and short duration of the activity. Other than the immediately adjacent
properties which have provided affected party approval, the proposed testing exercise
has been demonstrated to achieve compliance with the noise limits for temporary noise
events. A noise management plan will be implemented so that any potential adverse
noise effects generated from the proposal are appropriately mitigated or managed to be
within the allowable levels. The proposed activity is proposed to be 6 helicopter trips
occurs during a single weekday, carried out over a three hour period. The nature and

LUC60324964 Page 1
 duration of the testing is to be communicated to the neighbours prior to the testing
occurring. Any adverse noise and dust effects are short term and temporary.
Accordingly, any adverse noise effects arising from the proposal are found to be
acceptable and will be appropriately mitigated.

b. In terms of any potential dust and debris potentially generated by the helicopter wind,
the applicant has adopted a condition of consent to manage and reduce potential
windage generation. The subject site is screened by the existing built form and
separated by a distance of a minimum 20 metres from the nearest buildings. Therefore
any dust or debris generated from the proposal is found to be acceptable and will be
appropriately mitigated.

c. In terms of traffic and pedestrian safety, there is a potential for adverse traffic and
pedestrian effects noting that the flight path of the helicopters are over two public roads.
However, the proposed operation of the flights is such that the helicopters will be
required to maintain a height of approximately 30 metres above ground. Any landing
and take-off manoeuvres to and from the subject site will be vertical. The clearance
from public roads will ensure that any potential distraction to drivers and/or pedestrians
will not lead to adverse or unacceptable risk. Temporary signage has been proposed on
Paritai Drive to ensure that pedestrians and drivers are warned of the potential flights to
be undertaken on the subject site. The proposal is a one day event, with noise testing to
be carried out over a period of three hours. Any potential adverse on traffic and
pedestrians on Paritai Drive and Tamaki Drive are temporary in nature. Overall, the
adverse traffic and pedestrian safety effects will be appropriately mitigated.

d. In terms of neighbourhood character and amenity, the anticipated noise levels are
expected to comply for those sites beyond the adjacent properties, when taking into
account the temporary noise event standards. In this regard, the noise levels generated
by the proposal, in the context of the wider residential neighbourhood characteristics,
will not detract from the prevailing amenity and character of the area. The proposal
does not involve any physical development of a helicopter pad, noting that it is solely for
the testing of helicopter noise. The event is of a temporary duration for a single day with
testing being carried out over a period of three hours during the day time. Therefore any
adverse character and amenity effects are acceptable.

e. Any potential adverse effects on the cultural values of Mana Whenua are considered to
be appropriate and acceptable. With regards to the comments from Mana Whenua
regarding the modes of transport, it is noted that the proposal is not for the
establishment of a helicopter pad; rather it is solely for a limited number of flights to test
the noise levels generated by these aircraft. There are no known hawks (kahu) within
the area that may be impacted by the flight of helicopters. Noting the temporary nature
of the event (a single day over three hours), any potential for impact on wildlife (if any)
within the immediate area is minimal. In terms of any potential impacts onto Orakei
Marae, the separation distance between the subject site and the Marae is
approximately 1.2 kilometres. Therefore any adverse noise effects as a result of the
flight of the helicopters are avoided. From this distance, any visual presence of the
helicopter is no different to police helicopters flying over any urban areas across
Auckland. The AUPOP site of significance is not sensitive to the proposed activity, and
is well separated from the proposed flight path. Overall, any potential adverse effects on
Mana Whenua are acceptable and are appropriately mitigated.

LUC60324964 Page 2
 f. It is noted that the proposal does not involve the establishment of a physical helicopter
pad. This proposal to test helicopter noise does not predetermine any findings or
decisions in relation to any proposals [should they eventuate] for a permanent helipad
at this location - or close by.

g. With reference to s104(1)(ab), there are no specific offsetting or environmental

compensation measures proposed or agreed to by the applicant to ensure positive
effects on the environment .

2. In accordance with an assessment under s104(1)(b) of the RMA the proposal is consistent
with the relevant statutory documents. In particular the objectives and policies of the
Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part).

E40 Temporary Activities:

Objectives E40.2(1) – (4) aim to ensure that these activities contribute to the vibrancy of
Auckland, located and managed to reduce adverse effects onto amenity values,
communities and the natural environment. The objectives also aim to manage the adverse
effects onto the enjoyment of open space, as well as aiming to ensure these occur on in the
centre zones where large numbers of people are involved. In terms of policies E40.3(1) –
(6), the policies enables temporary activities while adverse effects such as traffic, noise and
waste are managed and minimised. Furthermore, the policies aim to manage the adverse
effects of temporary activities onto any scheduled ecological, heritage or mana whenua
areas. In this regard, the proposal does not involve large numbers of people, and traffic and
pedestrian safety is appropriately managed and/or avoided. With regards to noise, the
standards applicable to the residential zone are expected to be complied with over the three
hours period. With regards to any adverse effects onto the identified site of significance, no
objection was raised from Mana Whenua. The Orakei Marae is located 1.2 km away from
the subject site, and no adverse noise or visual effects are likely to result from the proposal
in relation to the Marae. Overall, the proposal is generally consistent with the objectives and
policies of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part).

3. In accordance with an assessment under s104(1)(c) of the RMA the other matters are
considered appropriate including monitoring and conditions of consent. Conditions have
been imposed to ensure that the activity is undertaken in accordance with the documents
provided, as well as to manage the adverse effects generated including noise, dust, traffic
and pedestrian safety.

4. The proposed development is consistent with Part 2 of the RMA as the effects of the
proposal on the wider environment and any persons are acceptable and appropriately
mitigated. It is also consistent with the objectives and policies of the operative plan and with
the sustainable management purpose of the Act.

2. Conditions
Under section 108 of the RMA, this consent is subject to the following conditions:

1. The proposed activity shall be carried out in accordance with the documents and drawings
and all supporting additional information submitted with the application, detailed below,
and all referenced by the council as resource consent number LUC60324964.

LUC60324964 Page 3
 • Application Form and Assessment of Environmental Effects prepared by Owen Burn
of Green Group Limited, dated 14/08/2018.
• Report titled, “74 Paritai Drive Helipad,” prepared by Peter Ibbotson of Marshall Day
Acoustics Limited, dated 09/08/2018
• S92 Response Letter titled, “Application LUC60324964 – Temporary noise event for
helicopter testing,” prepared by Owen Burn of Green Group Limited, dated
06/09/2018.

2. Under section 125 of the RMA, this consent lapses five years after the date it is granted
unless:

a. The consent is given effect to; or

b. The council extends the period after which the consent lapses.

3. The consent holder shall pay the council an initial consent compliance monitoring charge
of $660 (inclusive of GST), plus any further monitoring charge or charges to recover the
actual and reasonable costs incurred to ensure compliance with the conditions attached to
this consent.

Advice note:

The initial monitoring deposit is to cover the cost of inspecting the site, carrying out tests,
reviewing conditions, updating files, etc., all being work to ensure compliance with the
resource consent. In order to recover actual and reasonable costs, monitoring of
conditions, in excess of those covered by the deposit, shall be charged at the relevant
hourly rate applicable at the time. The consent holder will be advised of the further
monitoring charge. Only after all conditions of the resource consent have been met, will
the council issue a letter confirming compliance on request of the consent holder.

Before Commencement:

4. The consent holder shall inform Team Leader Central Monitoring of the estimated date
and time of testing within 10 working days and no later than 2 working days prior to the
tests occurring. As that date will be subject to weather conditions, the Team Leader
Central Monitoring shall also be advised of time of testing on the day of the testing or on
the day preceding the tests. If the tests are delayed, the consent holder shall advise
Team Leader Central Monitoring as soon as practical.

5. The consent holder shall establish temporary signs (see also Condition 6) to advise
pedestrians and drivers on Paritai Drive of the flights of helicopters to and from the subject
site. No flights shall occur prior to such signage being erected.

6. Prior to the commencement of the helicopter acoustic testing, the consent holder shall
hold a pre-start meeting that:

a. is located on the subject site

b. is scheduled not less than 5 days before the anticipated commencement of the
activity

c. includes the monitoring officer

LUC60324964 Page 4
 d. includes representation from the helicopter contracting company who will undertake
the activity and any suitably qualified acoustic professionals if required by conditions
below.

The following matters shall be discussed at the meeting:

• The timeframes applicable for the proposed flights

• Weather conditions, and the likelihood of changes to the schedule

• The type of craft to be used for the testing and the order of flights

• Important safety matters for consideration including erection of warning signage

• Measures for operating as quietly as possible.

The following information shall be available at the meeting:

• The noise management plan

• A plan identifying the location of signs warning traffic and pedestrians on Paritai
Drive

Duration:

7. The consent holder must ensure that the proposed acoustic testing is undertaken within a
total of six (6) trips. One trip is a combination of a single landing and take-off manoeuvre.
The six (6) trips shall occur within a period of three (3) hours and within the hours of 10:00
– 16:00 within a single day.

8. In the event of any changes to schedules due to weather conditions, the consent holder
shall report in writing (email) to Team Leader Central Monitoring and to the persons
served notice as required under the noise management plan, as per condition 10, within
24 hours of the revised date, time and duration for the activity. The duration and frequency
of the activity must be for the number of trips not undertaken on the original scheduled
testing date.

Noise Management Plan:

9. The consent holder shall ensure that the proposed noise testing and helicopter flights in
accordance with the recommendations of the report titled, “74 Paritai Drive Helipad,”
prepared by Peter Ibbotson of Marshall Day Acoustics Limited, dated 09/08/2018, to the
satisfaction of Team Leader Central Monitoring.

10. The consent holder shall engage a suitably qualified acoustic specialist to prepare a Noise
Management Plan (NMP) to identify how noise generated from the flights is managed.
The NMP shall identify the best practicable option for management and mitigation of all
noise generated by the helicopter flights, including where full compliance cannot be
achieved at all times. The NMP shall as a minimum address all the measures in Annex E
of NZS 6803:1999 and provides the required noise management for the pilot and consent
holder to implement. The NMP shall be submitted to the Council (Team Leader Central
Monitoring) for certification no less than ten (10) working days prior to commencement of
the activity. The NMP shall be in the form of a report or any other form acceptable to the
council.

LUC60324964 Page 5
 a. The NMP shall provide the details of temporary signage warning pedestrians and
drivers on Paritai Drive of the proposed Helicopter flights.

b. The methods proposed to contact persons in the immediate vicinity of the subject site
listed in the report titled, “74 Paritai Drive Helipad,” prepared by Peter Ibbotson of
Marshall Day Acoustics Limited, dated 09/08/2018.

c. The consent holder shall implement the certified NMP for the duration of the noise
event.

Dust management

11. There shall be no airborne or deposited dust beyond the subject site as a result of the
helicopter flights that in the opinion of the Team Leader Central Monitoring is noxious,
offensive or objectionable.

Advice Note: In assessing whether the effects are noxious, offensive or objectionable, the
following factors will form important considerations:

• The frequency of dust nuisance events

• The intensity of events, as indicated by dust quantity and the degree of nuisance

• The duration of each dust nuisance event

• The offensiveness of the discharge, having regard to the nature of the dust

• The location of the dust nuisance, having regard to the sensitivity of the receiving
environment.

It is recommended that potential dust management measures be discussed with the

Council’s monitoring officer who will guide you on the most appropriate approach to take.
Please contact the Team Leader Central Monitoring on
monitoring@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz for more details. Alternatively, please refer to the
Ministry for the Environment publication “Good Practice Guide for Assessing and
Managing the Environmental Effects of Dust Emissions”.

3. Advice notes
1. Any reference to number of days within this decision refers to working days as
defined in s2 of the RMA.

2. For the purpose of compliance with the conditions of consent, “the council” refers to
the council’s monitoring inspector unless otherwise specified. Please contact
monitoring@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz] to identify your allocated officer.

3. For more information on the resource consent process with Auckland Council see
the council’s website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz. General information on
resource consents, including making an application to vary or cancel consent
conditions can be found on the Ministry for the Environment’s website:
www.mfe.govt.nz.

4. If you as the applicant disagree with any of the above conditions, or disagree with
the additional charges relating to the processing of the application, you have a right
of objection pursuant to sections 357A or 357B of the Resource Management Act

LUC60324964 Page 6
 1991. Any objection must be made in writing to the council within 15 working days of
your receipt of this decision (for s357A) or receipt of the council invoice (for s357B).

5. The consent holder is responsible for obtaining all other necessary consents,
permits, and licences, including those under the Building Act 2004, Heritage New
Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 and the Civil Aviation Act 1990. This consent
does not remove the need to comply with all other applicable Acts (including the
Property Law Act 2007 and the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015), regulations,
relevant Bylaws, and rules of law. This consent does not constitute building consent
approval. Please check whether a building consent is required under the Building Act
2004.

Barry Kaye

Duty Commissioner

4 October 2018

LUC60324964 Page 7